OT: Hurricanes Lounge XLVI: Really, It's All About Beer and Bojangles

[Boom Boom Apathy]

Healthcare and the Schools have the same issues:



More money you dump in them, the more that goes to Admins.

When you have CEOs of non-profit hospitals and insurance companies making tens of millions of dollars, and when the health industry is spending $500M in lobbying, it certainly escalates that "admin" cost.

 

[Svechhammer]

Murdered Insurance CEO Had Deployed an AI to Automatically Deny Benefits for Sick People

Before United Healthcare CEO Brian Thompson was murdered, a lawsuit filed against the firm revealed just how bad its claims-denying was.

futurism.com

Man, just when I thought I couldn't think less of this guy....

Last November, the estates of two former UHC patients filed suit in Minnesota alleging that the insurer used an AI algorithm to deny and override claims to elderly patients that had been approved by their doctors.

The algorithm in question, known as nH Predict, allegedly had a 90 percent error rate — and according to the families of the two deceased men who filed the suit, UHC knew it.

 

[tarheelhockey]

I think these are just the excuses that politicians and media want us to believe are insurmountable along with some scare tactics. Those in charge don't WANT to do it because many of them are being funded by those that have a vested interest in NOT doing anything about it. Lobbyists for healthcare (pharmaceuticals, hospitals, insurance companies, etc. spend more than any other sector, by a large margin.

It’s really damn simple. Drop a regulatory sledgehammer on lobbying. Make it illegal for a company or association to give money to a politician. Ban associations of lobbyists, including professional firms. Straight up send people to prison for violations. A large amount of the corruption disappears and all of a sudden it’s not so comfortable for an insurance company to deliberately kill patients for profit.

Talk about this at all and the response is high-pitched shrieking about political liberties from ordinary people using talking points that trace back to politicians funded by those same lobbyists who are corrupting the system.

 

[Blueline Bomber]

It’s really damn simple. Drop a regulatory sledgehammer on lobbying. Make it illegal for a company or association to give money to a politician. Ban associations of lobbyists, including professional firms. Straight up send people to prison for violations. A large amount of the corruption disappears and all of a sudden it’s not so comfortable for an insurance company to deliberately kill patients for profit.

Talk about this at all and the response is high-pitched shrieking about political liberties from ordinary people using talking points that trace back to politicians funded by those same lobbyists who are corrupting the system.

They’ve actually done the opposite and made it so that it can NEVER be declared illegal. Citizens United v FEC back in 2010 basically said “Giving money to politicians is free speech, so the government cannot restrict it.”

Citizens United v. FEC - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[tarheelhockey]

They’ve actually done the opposite and made it so that it can NEVER be declared illegal. Citizens United v FEC back in 2010 basically said “Giving money to politicians is free speech, so the government cannot restrict it.”

Citizens United v. FEC - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

As we’ve seen with other “rights”, that lasts as long as we allow it to.

 

[Svechhammer]

They’ve actually done the opposite and made it so that it can NEVER be declared illegal. Citizens United v FEC back in 2010 basically said “Giving money to politicians is free speech, so the government cannot restrict it.”

Citizens United v. FEC - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Amazing how politicians passed a law that made it easier for anyone to funnel money to politicians. Not corrupt at all

 

[Blueline Bomber]

Amazing how politicians passed a law that made it easier for anyone to funnel money to politicians. Not corrupt at all

And even better, the Supreme Court recently ruled that bribing politicians is OK as well, but only if it’s done after the act happens. If you do it before, it’s bribery and illegal. If it’s done after, well, it’s just a token of appreciation.

Supreme Court wipes out anticorruption law that bars officials from taking gifts for past favors

The U.S. Supreme Court rules state and local officials may take gifts and payments for steering contracts to grateful patrons.

www.latimes.com

And I’m sure that ruling had nothing to do with the fact that Thomas was caught accepting millions of dollars worth of “gifts” when the Justices are (or were, I suppose) required to disclose such things.

 

[Anton Dubinchuk]

It's really f***ing damning that they are too shamed by the nature of their business to want to have their names public. Maybe if you didn't shit all over the American public for 20+ years prioritizing profits over people you wouldn't feel so scared now.

Maybe… or maybe this is just an important measure in response to the public response to this.

Good guy or bad guy, you’re getting lumped into this group now if you hold one of these positions.

 

[LakeLivin]

They’ve actually done the opposite and made it so that it can NEVER be declared illegal. Citizens United v FEC back in 2010 basically said “Giving money to politicians is free speech, so the government cannot restrict it.”

Citizens United v. FEC - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Critical to that ruling is the interpretation that "corporations are people, too" (i.e., the First Amendment protects associations of individuals in addition to individual speakers). Which it seems to me defeats the intent of contribution limits in the first place, i.e., limiting the ability of the wealthy to unduly influence the democratic process. If you've got someone who contributes the max as an individual but then makes the max contribution to multiple PACs, isn't that individual having an influence that the limits were designed to prevent?

And don't get me started on Super PACs. Anyone remember the Super Pac Stephen Colbert created back in 2011 Americans for a Better Tomorrow, Tomorrow that demonstrated how ridiculous the supposed controls built into the system actually were?

 

[Unsustainable]

Amazing how politicians passed a law that made it easier for anyone to funnel money to politicians. Not corrupt at all

I still think Politicians should wear Nascar uniforms with their top donors as logos.

 

[LakeLivin]

Or a jilted mistress, wife, wife's lover? The current situation makes it ripe for conspiracy

Thompson was separated from his wife. What if this wasn't related to insurance at all but was instead some heavy duty "Gone Girl" shit?
Talk about a brilliant plan!

[I don't believe that for a second, but what a twist it would be if it was!]

 

[Derailed75]

Thompson was separated from his wife. What if this wasn't related to insurance at all but was instead some heavy duty "Gone Girl" shit?
Talk about a brilliant plan!

[I don't believe that for a second, but what a twist it would be if it was!]

Yeah I feel like it has everything to do with insurance but again what a ripe time to spin a narrative and off someone because of some love tryst.

 

[Blueline Bomber]

I still think Politicians should wear Nascar uniforms with their top donors as logos.

Www.opensecrets.org

Find out who’s donating to who, organizations or individuals.

 

[Unsustainable]

Meanwhile on my side of the state and up the road from me...

 

[Unsustainable]

So a 100 acre control burned got out of control. Now it's over 700 acres and under control is what we've been told.

 

[Unsustainable]

 

[MinJaBen]

It’s really damn simple. Drop a regulatory sledgehammer on lobbying. Make it illegal for a company or association to give money to a politician. Ban associations of lobbyists, including professional firms. Straight up send people to prison for violations. A large amount of the corruption disappears and all of a sudden it’s not so comfortable for an insurance company to deliberately kill patients for profit.

Talk about this at all and the response is high-pitched shrieking about political liberties from ordinary people using talking points that trace back to politicians funded by those same lobbyists who are corrupting the system.

If you don't get rid of the ability for politicians to pool money together, ie parties, then this doesn't solve the problem. The root of all the evil in our political system is the tribal mentality and actions that are encouraged by parties.

" However [political parties] may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people and to usurp for themselves the reins of government, destroying afterwards the very engines which have lifted them to unjust dominion. "

George Washington - Farewell Address | Saturday, September 17, 1796

Of course this, like the reform of money in politics, is probably only fixed by an amendment to the constitution as the courts are likely to strike down any laws that prevent them their RVs.

 

[Blueline Bomber]

So apparently they found a suspect in the CEO shooting in PA. The guy had a similar gun to the one believed to be used in the shooting, a silencer, and a bunch of fake IDs that were similar to the ones the shooter apparently used. The suspect was apparently just chilling in a McDonald's with all this stuff on him

Or, the more likely scenario (IMO), they found a guy they could scapegoat for the shooting, since I doubt the actual shooter would still have the murder weapon on him after traveling through multiple state. Let alone all the other things.

 

[MinJaBen]

So apparently they found a suspect in the CEO shooting in PA. The guy had a similar gun to the one believed to be used in the shooting, a silencer, and a bunch of fake IDs that were similar to the ones the shooter apparently used. The suspect was apparently just chilling in a McDonald's with all this stuff on him

Or, the more likely scenario (IMO), they found a guy they could scapegoat for the shooting, since I doubt the actual shooter would still have the murder weapon on him after traveling through multiple state. Let alone all the other things.

So the most likely scenario is that law enforcement is going to pin it on some rando to get this over with? Not the more reasonable conjecture that a guy stupid enough to drop his mask in front of a camera so he could flirt with the check-in girl at a hostel is also stupid enough not to get rid of all of the evidence tying him to the crime?

 

[Blueline Bomber]

So the most likely scenario is that law enforcement is going to pin it on some rando to get this over with? Not the more reasonable conjecture that a guy stupid enough to drop his mask in front of a camera so he could flirt with the check-in girl at a hostel is also stupid enough not to get rid of all of the evidence tying him to the crime?

Is it more likely that the guy ditched his clothes and backpack in NY (which it was reported he did), but didn't ditch the other evidence of the crime? And then drove a few states away in a clothing and backpack similar to the one he ditched (which is how he was apparently identified in that McDonald's by an anonymous tip)?

Or maybe they realized the guy is in the wind, found someone who participated in the look-a-like contest:

And decided to go from there simply to wrap things up?

 

[hblueridgegal]

Is it more likely that the guy ditched his clothes and backpack in NY (which it was reported he did), but didn't ditch the other evidence of the crime? And then drove a few states away in a clothing and backpack similar to the one he ditched (which is how he was apparently identified in that McDonald's by an anonymous tip)?

Or maybe they realized the guy is in the wind, found someone who participated in the look-a-like contest:

View attachment 942318

And decided to go from there simply to wrap things up?

As someone said in the comments, we have entered the Black Mirror phase of our lives.

I used to love watch Scandal and was surprised it ended its run early. The showrunner said one of the reasons was that the scripts couldn't compete with reality anymore as far as shock value went.

 

[Unsustainable]

Crowders Mountain fire was not result of controlled burn that went wrong, officials said

Firefighters used “back burning” to contain the uncontrolled flames.

www.wbtv.com

 

[Lempo]

I used to love watch Scandal and was surprised it ended its run early. The showrunner said one of the reasons was that the scripts couldn't compete with reality anymore as far as shock value went.

Incidentally this is why a long-running Finnish humor publication stopped in early 00's. The reality had started to resemble Warthog too much.

 

[tarheelhockey]

Or, the more likely scenario (IMO), they found a guy they could scapegoat for the shooting, since I doubt the actual shooter would still have the murder weapon on him after traveling through multiple state. Let alone all the other things.

I mean, that guy could also just be like “hey I know I’m a sketchy dude but here’s 15 pieces of evidence that prove I wasn’t even in the same state as this incident”.

Attempting to pin it on a rando would be an insane gambit.

 

[cptjeff]

The guy left his phone on the scene. He wasn't a criminal mastermind, and was always going to get caught with this many resources being thrown at the case.

His only real hope is jury nullification. Which is not an entirely impossible scenario.